MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990887613 · doi:10.1177/0308518x19889970

The environmentalization of urban entrepreneurialism: From technopolis to start-up city

2019· article· en· W2990887613 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Levenda, Eliot Tretter

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipUnderpinningSustainabilityLeverage (statistics)Promotion (chess)Economic geographyUrban planningCorporate governanceEconomic growthPolitical scienceBusinessEconomicsManagementEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates two trends in contemporary forms of urban entrepreneurialism: (a) an increasing focus on cultivating entrepreneurship, and (b) the promotion of entrepreneurial ecosystems that leverage culture and sustainability to attract and support entrepreneurs. We argue that these trends signify a shift from the entrepreneurial city to new strategies that shape cities for entrepreneurs. Underpinning this development is a broad normalization and valorization of entrepreneurship as the dominant pathway for urban economic growth. Additionally, we show how sustainability and greening are enrolled in these economic development strategies, promising to bolster the environmental image of the city. We highlight these two changes by focusing on the intellectual foundations of the technopolis concept in Austin, Texas, and the development of a cleantech entrepreneurial ecosystem that has increasingly been leveraged in Austin’s entrepreneurial growth efforts. We offer insights into how the growing trend of “making cities for entrepreneurs” is reshaping urban entrepreneurial governance, potentially exacerbating inequalities in urban development.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207